Forget about domestic cricket, it's largely a waste of time (unless you're talking franchise cricket and making stars out of T20 players). ID talent early on, get them in quality U19/NZ A programmes where they get meaningful, hard cricket in home and foreign conditions, then they can bring that IP back to domestic cricket on the odd occasion to make it stronger. Hell, shut down the Plunket Shield. What has that competition produced lately? Get 22 guys playing amongst themselves, the North v South, **** I dunno - I know it doesn't do much for domestic plodder careers and the NZ CPA would hate it but dilute the pool of paid players in the longer forms, contract guys for T20 (run a longer Georgie Pie Amazing Assault if you have to) and focus on quality of cricket not quantity.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Unofficial* New Zealand Black Caps Thread
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
Yep, we're incapable. When you can't raise enough cash or incentive to have quality coaches in your national side, you're not going to produce at least 6 more to build talent in the regions or more at academy level etc are you?
I'm not fussed about pitch standards, I don't think it's effected our ability to produce talent over the years. Were pitches better in the 80s? I wasn't playing then (or at least not on properly mown decks) so I don't know for sure, but I doubt it. And if we're looking at focusing on a quality u19s/As programme, we can base them at Lincoln/wherever and focus on the quality of decks there, and switching them up to say #1 ground is hard and fast, #2 is a turner, #3 a green seamer or whatever. And get them overseas regularly as well to tap into the quality of other decks and expose them to foreign conditions and foreign bowlers/batsmen.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
Well do we need to keep as many FC grounds as we are, that will cut costs to begin with.
Flem274*
123/5
our best batsman at the last world cup would never have made a talent ID program at 20, or 25 for that matter. Mark Richardson and Iain O'Brien were produced by the system, as was Neil Wagner's true form. Watling was made by the Shield. Styris was. Astle too. Raval another.
Of the Chosen Ones, for every Kane, Trent and Ross we've had Ryder, Latham, Southee's wild fluctuations, McCullum stuffing about until his final years...the list goes on.
Diluting the pool by selecting a chosen few early on is weakness. It is everything weak about our system, where we pretend Kane is a freak of nature rather than a talented guy who worked very hard to make himself into a future ATG. The only batsman other than Kane who has taken his batting as seriously as he should have long term in the last 20 years is Ross Taylor, who surprise surprise is second to Kane. Jesse Ryder, Brendon McCullum, Tom Latham, Jacob Oram, Colin de Grandhomme and Colin Munro are all batsmen who should have had long careers averaging 40+ but did not for a variety of reasons.
We should take youth cricket very seriously because we don't. We don't play youth tests or ODIs outside world cups. That is weakness. Young players arrive in the Shield and get horribly exposed by experienced professionals like Andy Ellis who might not be the most gifted but have had 10+ years to figure out how they're going to be ruthlessly effective for their teams.
This is also a good thing. The Shield exists in part to expose the deficiencies of young players and provide everyone, young and old, a proving ground to work on their game.
If you remove the Plunket Shield you will never get another BJ Watling, Scott Styris, Mark Richardson, Iain O'Brien, Neil Wagner or Colin de Grandhomme. You will never give Andre Adams the chance to expose the next Kane Williamson to the realities of adult cricket.
We need to improve the Shield. There is no other way to get good. Only weak, desperate teams rely heavily on talent identification and chosen ones in the hopes of instant gratification for using less resources. We call this New Zealand for most of our history, and we were rightfully destroyed when we played this game.
Last edited:
Yes. Well put.
And find a way to give the "next tier" players more playing time. Matt Henry!!! Either rotate them in the playing XI, or rotate the spare seamer (Henry / Ferguson / van Beek etc) between the Black Caps squad and playing domestic.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
This should be a lot simpler than it is. If Matt Henry isn't needed when the test starts, he should be free to go back to domestic.
Grab some super fielding sub to run the drinks out and for 12th man duties.
If the domestic games kick off before the test, yank him out of the domestic game if needed for the test - I am weary of McGrath standing on cricket balls just before the toss, but this does not prevent the former, and could be repeated for nearby FC games. Can get to a lot of places in NZ within a couple of hours.
He has had a ridiculous lack of NZC domestic cricket in the last while since being the specialist 12th man.
Last edited:
It's probably worth reiterating that I'm not saying scrap all forms of 4-day cricket at domestic level. I'm saying we don't have the player depth and we're not getting much out of six Plunket Shield teams. I'm saying run a North v South or some such series of four-day cricket where the best 24 (make them 12 v 12 by all means) guys play meaningful cricket to prove themselves for the step up to NZ A and NZ. Maybe 2-3 of those sides have to be under 23 or something, I'm not sure. But guys like Andrew Ellis, Grant Elliott (presume you meant him for our best batsman at the World Cup) Obba, Wagner, Richardson etc would all be there. There can be domestic A cricket, so Auckland and ND play regularly, CD play Wellington and Otago play Canterbury to prove worth to be picked up. And can still run a 1-day comp, and the franchise sort of look for the T20.
Under my system you are going to get all those names. They'll prove themselves through the North v South, more NZ A fixtures etc. Basically I'm saying facilitate just as much 4-day cricket but every time there's a four-day game it's quality opposition on good decks - not half-strength sides on a feather bed at Rangiora. Quality over quantity. Not less resources at all. And by contracting less guys, you free up cash resources to facilitate these matches, NZ A trips etc. I don't know exactly how it looks because my job is not to govern NZC's domestic and pathways product but that's my model - less players, more higher-quality fixtures (at four-day level at least, if not List A as well. Don't change T20, keep the pool deeper there).
This is one of the arguments for my model. Matt Henry goes back to FC and is that doing him any good, when his home ground is Rangiora and is as dead as a dodo, and he's not bowling to Test quality players by and large? If he went back to that level, and the North v South model was used around Test series (which note David White, is how fixtures should be for four-dayers) he'd be bowling to guys like the Luke Woodcocks, Will Young, Blundell, Papps, Jesse, Greg Hay etc.
Flem274*
123/5
North vs South should exist at the end of the Shield season as three 5 day games. This will never happen because David White and NZC are weakness.
We get plenty from 6 teams. Reduce our effective pool to 24 professionals and 40 odd A cricketers mucking about in 3 day cricket and we're dead.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
The shield season goes into April doesn't it?
Might be better to play a game North v South FC game earlier in the season.
I think a three match series is a bit ambitious. But just one game pre NZA games would help.
More NZA tours and games would be my ideal.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
I reckon have a week of North-South, a 4 dayer, an ODI and 2 T20s. Pick 15 players for each squad and pick your XIs from those.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
I instinctively dislike the idea of a greater focus on just two domestic teams with the level below that becoming more of an afterthought. The player pool just becomes too small. And as much as we might like to think the North and South team's selectors would do a great job of identifying future NZ players, a) have you seen what bizarre things selectors come up with sometimes? and b) even the best selectors are never going to be able to consistently forecast how young players (especially batsmen) will develop over the next 5-10 years.
I also believe some players (domestic stalwart batsmen especially) benefit significantly from the familiarity with their opposition that they gain by playing against the same people repeatedly. A smaller environment where you just play against the same players even more frequently becomes too cosy. It helps players who have the opposite skill to what international cricket requires, which is the ability to learn quickly and adapt to new conditions, new opponents and different opponent mentalities.
Even if the North and South teams somehow ended up playing a lot of 'A' level cricket or even more unlikely, ended up gaining entry to the Sheffield Shield, I would still be very sceptical. Small player pool, a large step up from the level below to the North/South level so the sides are very hard to break into, and then there are problems like these hypothetical North/South coaches and selectors becoming over-familiar with players and having favourites - at least at the moment you can move to a different domestic team.
Also think Plunket Shield pitches have been a lot more varied and generally better than they were a decade ago when 125k medium pacers dominated. I think the season just gone was a bit of a regression to that, where the pitches were too bowler-friendly, so I hope that doesn't repeat next season.
Overall, I think the Plunket Shield is doing a decent job for NZ cricket and that's reflected in the test side performing quite well.
I also believe some players (domestic stalwart batsmen especially) benefit significantly from the familiarity with their opposition that they gain by playing against the same people repeatedly. A smaller environment where you just play against the same players even more frequently becomes too cosy. It helps players who have the opposite skill to what international cricket requires, which is the ability to learn quickly and adapt to new conditions, new opponents and different opponent mentalities.
Even if the North and South teams somehow ended up playing a lot of 'A' level cricket or even more unlikely, ended up gaining entry to the Sheffield Shield, I would still be very sceptical. Small player pool, a large step up from the level below to the North/South level so the sides are very hard to break into, and then there are problems like these hypothetical North/South coaches and selectors becoming over-familiar with players and having favourites - at least at the moment you can move to a different domestic team.
Also think Plunket Shield pitches have been a lot more varied and generally better than they were a decade ago when 125k medium pacers dominated. I think the season just gone was a bit of a regression to that, where the pitches were too bowler-friendly, so I hope that doesn't repeat next season.
Overall, I think the Plunket Shield is doing a decent job for NZ cricket and that's reflected in the test side performing quite well.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
That all sounds good to me.
But dropping from 6 teams to 5 may also raise the standards, and keep almost all the benefits you suggest.
I don't think 2 teams is a good idea, but I would like to see a north v south or probables vs possibles match each year for NZA selection.
I would like to see more NZA tours and hosting.
But what I really want to see is batsmen making runs at FC so when bowlers are taking cheap wickets, it means something more than what is happening of late.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
I think everyone would be happy with that - a one-off North vs South with something on the line (like selection for an A tour) would be fun, and more A cricket would of course be a good thing.
Eep, Hess has resigned more to come.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/104528192/black-caps-coach-mike-hesson-in-shock-resignation
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/104528192/black-caps-coach-mike-hesson-in-shock-resignation
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Just saw the article. Wow
Wow. Burnout? He's been home with his family since the IPL, just can't handle being away anymore? But then he seems like the kind of guy that would insist on seeing out the final year.
Not at all ideal to be hunting for a new coach less than 12 months out from a World Cup.